In K. Tanna & Co v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal & 3 Others, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: 2.The petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn with liberty reserved to espouse such remedy as may be available in law.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO.2477 OF 2009
K. Tanna & Co.,..Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal & 3 others
..Respondents.
Mr.Pramodkumar Parida with Mr.Anil Mishra i/by M/s.PKP Legal Solutions for the petitioner.
Mr.Suresh Kumar for the respondent.
CORAM : Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud & J.P. Devadhar, JJ.
DATE : 4[th] March, 2010.
P.C. :
1.The order which is challenged in these proceedings is of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal by which a Miscellaneous Application under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was dismissed. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the petition with liberty reserved to agitate all questions by pursuing the appropriate remedy against the principal order passed by the Tribunal.
2.The petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn with liberty reserved to espouse such remedy as may be available in law. There shall be no order as to costs.
(J.P. Devadhar, J.)
(Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.
EaseValue